I've got as much vested interest in Microsoft and their products as any intrenched Linux-dev or seasoned user has in Linux - anything wrong with that? My background is an open book, and my former relationship with Microsoft is well-known. What you and apparently most of the poser...oops...posters here forget is that I cut my teeth on the very first versions of BSD running on several of the PDP-11/70's I admin'ed at LBL (along with 2 CDC 6000's and a CDC 7600Z) in the late 70's/early 80's. I am *not* a Unix-o-phobe by any stretch of the imagination. I have Knoppix running on an old-disused Toshiba laptop, I'll be installing the latest OpenBSD build on an older IBM GL300 in my home lab this week. I'm even somewhat involved in an Open Source project that some of you might have heard of - it's this little MS SHELL32.DLL replacement called "LiteStep" (although I'm not as involved with LiteStep as I was before the whole thing forked into DarkStep, RetroStep and the OTS builds).
If all of this makes me a Microsoft "shill", then so be it.
Unlike others here, I am not a "karma-whore" and am not here to be "loved" - or didn't you get that in my previous posts?
The Open Source community is just that - a communuty...and once someone starts pointing out some unsavory things about "The Community" the rest come out swinging. It's almost a gang-like mentality at times.
Please explain to me how Linux = RMS shill - this should be entertaining.
Why is it when someone tries to call a spade a spade everyone gets so freakin' uptight?
Does the truth hurt *that* bad?
I'll make you and the entire world a deal - make Linux as easy to install, as easy to use for the *average* user and provide the level of industry-wide support that Microsoft provides for their customers along with all of the driver support to make installation a breeze and I'll burn every MS pre-release Microsoft CDs that I have, including my prized posession - one of the ORIGINAL Windows 95 RTM "Gold" CDs - and worship at the altar of the Torvalds/RMS/OSS Triumvirate for ever.
I think people are missing some very important items here:
1) There is a high degree of probability that Linus Torvalds *did* write the original Linux kernel on his own.
2) Since so many people contributed to the Linux Kernel over the past years, it is *possible* that some code from proprietary sources made it into the Linux kernel.
3) Whether any proprietay code is currently included in the present Linux kernel is still under speculation. SCO *did* show several snipets of code that *were* proprietary and *were* part of the 2.4 codebase; hence, it *is* possible that other proprietary code is still within the current 2.6.x codebase.
What I'd like to know is this: what kind of code review goes into the process of submitting code to the Linux Kernel? Is there actually a group of people who check the code for possible violations of the inclusion of proprietary code into the kernel, thereby invalidating the GPL/LGPL or whatever Open Source licensing the Linux Kernel falls under? I'm aware that there are people who check the submitted code for other tendencies, but it would be interesting to see if there is anyone who watches for the inclusion of proprietary code into the Linux kernel before it actually gets included. In other words: does code checking include the legal requirements under the licensing model that Linux uses?
Of course it's respected by many in the US. Try to infringe on an issued US Patent and see how much attention you'll get. THAT'S Respect!
Maybe you're confusing the words "Respect" with "Love" or "Admiration". I can respect the business-end of a.357 Magnum. That doesn't mean that I want to send it flowers.
Linus Torvalds is EMPLOYED by OSDN, who also happens to own Slashdot.
Never trust everything you read. OSDN & Slashdot have a vested interest in "defending" Torvalds, as well as defending Linux - regardless of whether Torvalds *created* Linux on his own or he copied and/or transliterated code from other sources.
From what I've heard, it's lighter than the Archos AV320, but according to the published specs the Archos is 350g (12.5 oz) where the Zen is 400g (14.10 oz) - someone isn't right. I'm sure that the difference is hard to detect. I haven't seen the actual Archos UI, but the UI for the Zen is based on the Windows Media Center.
Also, it appears that the Archos AV320 has more interface options than the Zen, including SPDIF In/Out. The screen size is the same (QVGA).
I had the opportunity to beta-review the Creative Zen PMC at Microsoft a few weeks ago, and was fairly impressed with the Creative Zen. Video playback was exceptional for a QVGA screen, Audio playback (mp3 or WMA) was very clean and crisp - in fact, 128-bit mp3's sounded as good on playback as 192-bit or better...and I have very good ears (not Golden, but close). It was fairly lightweight, although heavier that an iPod but had similar weight to any other kind of device. Connection options were to an included USB dock, and USB 1.1 and 2.0 are supported - with USB 2.0 the preferred interface & speed (naturally). We did the usual "shake it" test to check for playback stability during Video and Audio playback and didn't detect any skips or HD resynch problems. An extra feature was the ability to upload image files (jpeg) and be able to do a slideshow. This device might work well for portable presentations, but I can't remember if there is a video-out jack.
Battery usage didn't seem to be much of a problem, since the number of renderable bits you're pulling off of the drive to the device's FlashROM or RAM are only needed to render at QVGA size.
The Zen does a very nice auto-synch with pre-defined folders using WMP 10 (yes, we got to preview & play with that as well) - however, the synch of pre-recored media is only PC-to-Device and not Device-to-PC. We didn't get to check-out the TV Recording feature, so I'm not sure if that would be an exception to the unidirectional synching functions.
When I was there the total head-count of non-MS people at this preview was maybe 20. They had people in and out all day with a variety of hardware to test their device with (the prerequsite for attending was to bring your own personal system to the Event to test it against non-HCL, real-world systems and your average user) A fairly decent cross-section of users appeared to be there, with most of them bringing laptops - I elected to bring my desktop system along with me on the 2+ hour drive to Redmond.
The most humorous part was my loading-up on to the Zen of the "Red.vs Blue" "PDC" episode - where a sweat-drenched Steve Balmer shouted & chanted the word "Developers" over and over and over to the crowd at the 2003 PDC to the point of exhaustion. We had a good laugh at their reaction, which was pretty funny in and of itself.
Unfortunately, the "Thank You" gift wasn't the usual fair ("pick a Microsoft software title on this table"), but we were given a nice pair of Sennheizer PX-100 headphones and free munchies for the afternoon.
They are going now to pay to fix their mistakes with some fraction of their pile of cash, but more importantly, they are going to have to design security into their software up front. This is going to significantly slow down their pace of churning their software updates. This loss of some of their competetive edge is going to be the real price that they pay.
Can you say "Paladium"?
Of course, the "Free Software" lakeys are up-in-arms because initiatives like Paladium will control access rights on the given system & OS, and inforce DRM.
I find it humerous when the FSF and their fans hue-and-cry for security and tout how "secure" Linux is, and when Microsoft takes some initiative like Paladium and utterly socket-down system security that they whine about DRM proposals. You can't have it both ways.
For example: If Microsoft had instituted Anti-Virus software of their own, McAfee & Symantec would have been up-in-arms and tooted the well-worn "anti-competitive practices" horn. Microsoft *did* at one time have their own AV software, and it sucked - so, it died a silent death and no one heard about it again. It will be interesting to see McAfee & Symantec's response when Microsoft unveils their 2nd attempt at AV software & security.
I'm sure that I've stated this before in previous posts, but most (if not all) of the security holes found in Microsoft Operating Systems over the last 15 years were in services & protocols that were developed and meant to be used in a LAN environment - where you (usually) should be able to trust fellow employees on the LAN not to try to do something stupid. Of course, the Internet changed alot of what "Networks" meant to most software companies, and they had to change and adapt as best they could without causing trouble for the existing customer-base and the slew of products that depended on these protocols & services.
On the other hand, the Internet was build upon UNIX and it's variants - including Linux. That does not necessarily mean that Linux, in and of itself, is more "secure" than Windows - just that those that have worked with *NIX already know how to sock-down the security because it's virtually a prerequisite for properly setting-up a *NIX system on the Internet. *Any* Server/Network Admin worth their salt should know how to secure the systems they are supporting - if they don't then they should be tossed-out of their positions and fired because they pose a security risk to their employer; this goes for *NIX as well as Windows.
Even better than that, look how long it's been since we've seen Victoria Recano (now with "Inside Edition"), Erica Hill (now on CNN) or Jennifer London (now on MSNBC) doing TechTV/ZDTV News or CyberCrime? Even Kate Botello saw the writing on the wall ages ago when she left CFH & TSS.
Many others jumped ship before Michaela, but I think her departure was the biggest.
I just happen to think it's more of a case of "I'm not a lawyer, but I've seen enough of the Perry Mason episodes, and LA Law to talk like I know something".
It's like the "IANAL" is a dodge for someone who would really like to be a lawyer or who thinks they know "a little" about Jurisprudence.
You use the "IANAL" tag, but you try to sound like you are, or at least you think that you have some kind of understanding of what "law" is all about.
Pretty hillarious.
If you know anything about Jurisprudence, you would know that since he PUBLICLY ADMITTED to the intrusion, and EVIDENCE WAS COLLECTED to substantiate his claim, he IS guilty. Confession of a crime *IS* the equivalent of "Probable Cause" - that's why we have things like the 5th Ammendment to protect one's self from self-incrimination. Confessions of a crime are not inadmissable in a Court of Law, bucko!
Chances are that if Adrian had shut his yap about his "exploits" he'd be a free man; but, like most "hackers", the street-cred and "|337n355" of their activities and boasting of them is how they climb the ladder of their "society".
The claims of Adrian Lamo, stating that he was doing this "out of the goodness of his heart" are pure bunk - he was using Lexis/Nexus to find legal info on him, his family, etc. He just used the "oh, I'll call them and tell them that their network is swiss-cheese and they'll thank me and forget about what I REALLY did on their network" - which is a sure-sign of a sociopath.
Pretty pathetic, actually - such a waste of brainpower & talent.
Yeah, looks like you did. Sorry to hear that, man. I'm sure that because of the number of people who caught on to this and sent articles to the content-nazis here that Malda said (as he probably does alot of the time) "Hey - that's a cool idea for an article....I'll STEAL IT and use it as if I discovered it on my own"
I may have negative "karma", but Malda and the rest of the dolts behind/. have infinitely lower standards and respect for their users/members/shills/detractors.
These are the folks that build the legendary "KLAT2" cluster that made specs equal with the 200th entry on the Top500 list at http://www.top500.org - Supercomputer processing power at only $41,000.00, and "KAYS0" - which was the first computer ever to break the $100.00/GFlop barrier at $84.00/GFlop. Using an innovative networking scheme called "Flat Network Neighborhood" (FNN), bisection bandwidth (one of the measurement points of supercomputer/cluster performace) is very significant, based on the overall cost of the system. Both KLAT2 and KAYS0 turn in very impressive Linpack (ScaLAPACK) scores for the overall cost of the system.
I think I heard of some company that was in the process of reviving the old Indian company and their designs, including their double-pumper (aka two-stroke) engines - but I don't exactly remember the source. Also, wasn't H-D bringing back two-strokers or at least contemplating it?
That "400" would be sweet to see when it's completed.
Actually, the "Double-rotor" drive might be in reference to a rotary gearbox to drive both wheels, hence a driveshaft instead of chaindrive. When Kaneda mounts his bike and starts it up, you hear a standard motorcycle engine starting-up.
Electric motorcycles do not make the sounds that you hear in the movie - they would be virtually silent.
Slashdot Mirror
I've got as much vested interest in Microsoft and their products as any intrenched Linux-dev or seasoned user has in Linux - anything wrong with that? My background is an open book, and my former relationship with Microsoft is well-known. What you and apparently most of the poser...oops...posters here forget is that I cut my teeth on the very first versions of BSD running on several of the PDP-11/70's I admin'ed at LBL (along with 2 CDC 6000's and a CDC 7600Z) in the late 70's/early 80's. I am *not* a Unix-o-phobe by any stretch of the imagination. I have Knoppix running on an old-disused Toshiba laptop, I'll be installing the latest OpenBSD build on an older IBM GL300 in my home lab this week. I'm even somewhat involved in an Open Source project that some of you might have heard of - it's this little MS SHELL32.DLL replacement called "LiteStep" (although I'm not as involved with LiteStep as I was before the whole thing forked into DarkStep, RetroStep and the OTS builds).
If all of this makes me a Microsoft "shill", then so be it.
Unlike others here, I am not a "karma-whore" and am not here to be "loved" - or didn't you get that in my previous posts?
The Open Source community is just that - a communuty...and once someone starts pointing out some unsavory things about "The Community" the rest come out swinging. It's almost a gang-like mentality at times.
Please explain to me how Linux = RMS shill - this should be entertaining.
Why is it when someone tries to call a spade a spade everyone gets so freakin' uptight?
Does the truth hurt *that* bad?
I'll make you and the entire world a deal - make Linux as easy to install, as easy to use for the *average* user and provide the level of industry-wide support that Microsoft provides for their customers along with all of the driver support to make installation a breeze and I'll burn every MS pre-release Microsoft CDs that I have, including my prized posession - one of the ORIGINAL Windows 95 RTM "Gold" CDs - and worship at the altar of the Torvalds/RMS/OSS Triumvirate for ever.
Game?
--ScottKin
I think people are missing some very important items here:
1) There is a high degree of probability that Linus Torvalds *did* write the original Linux kernel on his own.
2) Since so many people contributed to the Linux Kernel over the past years, it is *possible* that some code from proprietary sources made it into the Linux kernel.
3) Whether any proprietay code is currently included in the present Linux kernel is still under speculation. SCO *did* show several snipets of code that *were* proprietary and *were* part of the 2.4 codebase; hence, it *is* possible that other proprietary code is still within the current 2.6.x codebase.
What I'd like to know is this: what kind of code review goes into the process of submitting code to the Linux Kernel? Is there actually a group of people who check the code for possible violations of the inclusion of proprietary code into the kernel, thereby invalidating the GPL/LGPL or whatever Open Source licensing the Linux Kernel falls under? I'm aware that there are people who check the submitted code for other tendencies, but it would be interesting to see if there is anyone who watches for the inclusion of proprietary code into the Linux kernel before it actually gets included. In other words: does code checking include the legal requirements under the licensing model that Linux uses?
--ScottKin
Of course it's respected by many in the US. Try to infringe on an issued US Patent and see how much attention you'll get. THAT'S Respect!
.357 Magnum. That doesn't mean that I want to send it flowers.
Maybe you're confusing the words "Respect" with "Love" or "Admiration". I can respect the business-end of a
--ScottKin
...just like the Linux shills:
Slashdot
OSDN
Kuro5in
Richard Stallman
Tannenbaum
etc, etc, etc.
The door opens both ways, bucko!
--ScottKin
This is an absolutely STUPID comment.
Switch shells in Linux and you MUST learn how to do things differently.
Can you do the same things under KDE as you can in Gnome, in exactly the same way?
It's hard to believe that Linux users are actually *this* naive - aren't Linux users supposed to be more intelligent because they use Linux?
So much for that "Linux Myth"
--ScottKin
To remind everyone:
Linus Torvalds is EMPLOYED by OSDN, who also happens to own Slashdot.
Never trust everything you read. OSDN & Slashdot have a vested interest in "defending" Torvalds, as well as defending Linux - regardless of whether Torvalds *created* Linux on his own or he copied and/or transliterated code from other sources.
The word that comes to my mind is "nepotism".
--ScottKin
From what I've heard, it's lighter than the Archos AV320, but according to the published specs the Archos is 350g (12.5 oz) where the Zen is 400g (14.10 oz) - someone isn't right. I'm sure that the difference is hard to detect. I haven't seen the actual Archos UI, but the UI for the Zen is based on the Windows Media Center.
Also, it appears that the Archos AV320 has more interface options than the Zen, including SPDIF In/Out. The screen size is the same (QVGA).
Hope that helps!
--ScottKin
When I went to beta-preview this at Microsoft Redmond, I specifically asked about DivX/X-vid support.
Their answer, as expected:
"We're only supporting WMV due to the lack of DRM capabilities in the other codec formats"
I think that pretty much answers it.
--ScottKin
I had the opportunity to beta-review the Creative Zen PMC at Microsoft a few weeks ago, and was fairly impressed with the Creative Zen. Video playback was exceptional for a QVGA screen, Audio playback (mp3 or WMA) was very clean and crisp - in fact, 128-bit mp3's sounded as good on playback as 192-bit or better...and I have very good ears (not Golden, but close). It was fairly lightweight, although heavier that an iPod but had similar weight to any other kind of device. Connection options were to an included USB dock, and USB 1.1 and 2.0 are supported - with USB 2.0 the preferred interface & speed (naturally). We did the usual "shake it" test to check for playback stability during Video and Audio playback and didn't detect any skips or HD resynch problems. An extra feature was the ability to upload image files (jpeg) and be able to do a slideshow. This device might work well for portable presentations, but I can't remember if there is a video-out jack.
.vs Blue" "PDC" episode - where a sweat-drenched Steve Balmer shouted & chanted the word "Developers" over and over and over to the crowd at the 2003 PDC to the point of exhaustion. We had a good laugh at their reaction, which was pretty funny in and of itself.
Battery usage didn't seem to be much of a problem, since the number of renderable bits you're pulling off of the drive to the device's FlashROM or RAM are only needed to render at QVGA size.
The Zen does a very nice auto-synch with pre-defined folders using WMP 10 (yes, we got to preview & play with that as well) - however, the synch of pre-recored media is only PC-to-Device and not Device-to-PC. We didn't get to check-out the TV Recording feature, so I'm not sure if that would be an exception to the unidirectional synching functions.
When I was there the total head-count of non-MS people at this preview was maybe 20. They had people in and out all day with a variety of hardware to test their device with (the prerequsite for attending was to bring your own personal system to the Event to test it against non-HCL, real-world systems and your average user) A fairly decent cross-section of users appeared to be there, with most of them bringing laptops - I elected to bring my desktop system along with me on the 2+ hour drive to Redmond.
The most humorous part was my loading-up on to the Zen of the "Red
Unfortunately, the "Thank You" gift wasn't the usual fair ("pick a Microsoft software title on this table"), but we were given a nice pair of Sennheizer PX-100 headphones and free munchies for the afternoon.
All in all, an excellent device.
--ScottKin
It might as well be - same useless leftist politics, same self-centered mamby-pamby attitudes.
Oh, I'm sorry - I thought this was all about Spain...but then again...
--ScottKin
Can you say "Paladium"?
Of course, the "Free Software" lakeys are up-in-arms because initiatives like Paladium will control access rights on the given system & OS, and inforce DRM.
I find it humerous when the FSF and their fans hue-and-cry for security and tout how "secure" Linux is, and when Microsoft takes some initiative like Paladium and utterly socket-down system security that they whine about DRM proposals. You can't have it both ways.
For example: If Microsoft had instituted Anti-Virus software of their own, McAfee & Symantec would have been up-in-arms and tooted the well-worn "anti-competitive practices" horn. Microsoft *did* at one time have their own AV software, and it sucked - so, it died a silent death and no one heard about it again. It will be interesting to see McAfee & Symantec's response when Microsoft unveils their 2nd attempt at AV software & security.
I'm sure that I've stated this before in previous posts, but most (if not all) of the security holes found in Microsoft Operating Systems over the last 15 years were in services & protocols that were developed and meant to be used in a LAN environment - where you (usually) should be able to trust fellow employees on the LAN not to try to do something stupid. Of course, the Internet changed alot of what "Networks" meant to most software companies, and they had to change and adapt as best they could without causing trouble for the existing customer-base and the slew of products that depended on these protocols & services.
On the other hand, the Internet was build upon UNIX and it's variants - including Linux. That does not necessarily mean that Linux, in and of itself, is more "secure" than Windows - just that those that have worked with *NIX already know how to sock-down the security because it's virtually a prerequisite for properly setting-up a *NIX system on the Internet. *Any* Server/Network Admin worth their salt should know how to secure the systems they are supporting - if they don't then they should be tossed-out of their positions and fired because they pose a security risk to their employer; this goes for *NIX as well as Windows.
--ScottKin
Even better than that, look how long it's been since we've seen Victoria Recano (now with "Inside Edition"), Erica Hill (now on CNN) or Jennifer London (now on MSNBC) doing TechTV/ZDTV News or CyberCrime? Even Kate Botello saw the writing on the wall ages ago when she left CFH & TSS.
Many others jumped ship before Michaela, but I think her departure was the biggest.
--ScottKin
Try this:
http://www.andersontv.co.uk
Thunderbirds
Captain Scarlet
Stingray
UFO
Space:1999
--ScottKin
How about http://www.thebroken.org/ ????
Or, how about http://www.kevinrose.com ????
--ScottKin
I just happen to think it's more of a case of "I'm not a lawyer, but I've seen enough of the Perry Mason episodes, and LA Law to talk like I know something".
It's like the "IANAL" is a dodge for someone who would really like to be a lawyer or who thinks they know "a little" about Jurisprudence.
Remember: "A little" knowledge can be dangerous.
--ScottK
Obviously, this mental degenerate has some kind of twisted vendetta against me.
He's probably one of the fscktards on WebChat who got pissed-off because I smacked his lard-but by k-lining him for abusing my network.
Pretty damn juvenile, to let this spill-over into a public forum.
Is there no limit to your stupidity - or are you so utterly bored that you spend your time on mommy and daddy's PC harrassing people?
Let me straighten you out by putting this in words you might be able to understand:
"You say you're not a lawyer, but you try to make yourself look like one"
Did you get that now, fscktard?
What a twit!
--ScottKin
Yeah - you ARE in trouble if you assist someone in obtaining controlled substances. It's something called "Aiding and Abetting"
Retard.
--ScottKin
Your "commentary" is interesting.
You use the "IANAL" tag, but you try to sound like you are, or at least you think that you have some kind of understanding of what "law" is all about.
Pretty hillarious.
If you know anything about Jurisprudence, you would know that since he PUBLICLY ADMITTED to the intrusion, and EVIDENCE WAS COLLECTED to substantiate his claim, he IS guilty. Confession of a crime *IS* the equivalent of "Probable Cause" - that's why we have things like the 5th Ammendment to protect one's self from self-incrimination. Confessions of a crime are not inadmissable in a Court of Law, bucko!
Chances are that if Adrian had shut his yap about his "exploits" he'd be a free man; but, like most "hackers", the street-cred and "|337n355" of their activities and boasting of them is how they climb the ladder of their "society".
The claims of Adrian Lamo, stating that he was doing this "out of the goodness of his heart" are pure bunk - he was using Lexis/Nexus to find legal info on him, his family, etc. He just used the "oh, I'll call them and tell them that their network is swiss-cheese and they'll thank me and forget about what I REALLY did on their network" - which is a sure-sign of a sociopath.
Pretty pathetic, actually - such a waste of brainpower & talent.
--ScottKin
Yeah, looks like you did. Sorry to hear that, man. I'm sure that because of the number of people who caught on to this and sent articles to the content-nazis here that Malda said (as he probably does alot of the time) "Hey - that's a cool idea for an article....I'll STEAL IT and use it as if I discovered it on my own"
/. have infinitely lower standards and respect for their users/members/shills/detractors.
I may have negative "karma", but Malda and the rest of the dolts behind
Rob Malda - the ultimate "Karma Whore".
--ScottKin
Go check-out http://aggregate.org
These are the folks that build the legendary "KLAT2" cluster that made specs equal with the 200th entry on the Top500 list at http://www.top500.org - Supercomputer processing power at only $41,000.00, and "KAYS0" - which was the first computer ever to break the $100.00/GFlop barrier at $84.00/GFlop. Using an innovative networking scheme called "Flat Network Neighborhood" (FNN), bisection bandwidth (one of the measurement points of supercomputer/cluster performace) is very significant, based on the overall cost of the system. Both KLAT2 and KAYS0 turn in very impressive Linpack (ScaLAPACK) scores for the overall cost of the system.
--ScottKin
Heya, Mr. Malda - nice job at hijacking article submissions!
/. is just an artificial ego-inflation machine for someone who seems to think that he is much more self-important than he actually is.
2004-04-04 11:16:32 Flashmob + Clusters = FlashmobSupercomputing (articles,tech) (rejected)
More proof that
The least thing you could do is give fair credit where it is due, instead of making things look like you found this all by yourself - or did you?
Time to fess-up, Rob!
--ScottKin
You can find themes for both LiteStep and DesktopX at DeviantArt and WinCustomize.
For an example of how the depth of customization you can get for Shell Enhancers, check out my DesktopX screenshot --ScottKin
AEton - in your sig you forgot the following:
...and don't forget that viewing Slashdot too often can cause Synaptic seepage
1 Burdine Intelligent Translator...and Thompson Eye-phones.
--ScottKin
I think I heard of some company that was in the process of reviving the old Indian company and their designs, including their double-pumper (aka two-stroke) engines - but I don't exactly remember the source. Also, wasn't H-D bringing back two-strokers or at least contemplating it?
That "400" would be sweet to see when it's completed.
--ScottKin
Actually, the "Double-rotor" drive might be in reference to a rotary gearbox to drive both wheels, hence a driveshaft instead of chaindrive. When Kaneda mounts his bike and starts it up, you hear a standard motorcycle engine starting-up.
Electric motorcycles do not make the sounds that you hear in the movie - they would be virtually silent.
Remember this, however; It's just a cartoon.
--ScottKin